> but most of the really interesting> developments that techno-based artists are using these days actually came> from the arts areas themselves.

If you mean the particular tricks they use (have developed) I'll agree.

But the technology is almost exclusively due to physicists, engineers,
and mathematicians. It's actually decades old. It's just they don't of
course spend their time making art with it. And I'd be very hard convinced
that ANY software employed for the arts alone has made an original
contribution to graphics. Exactly the same tasks are required by many
people, and foremost scientists.

I'll grant one possible exception; graphics for computer games.

It's natural that these techniques flow more from pure science to applied
science and the arts than the other way. Artists are, primarily, end
users, whereas many others are researchers and developers.

Ask yourself. Do you actually know what other disciplines are using ?
Have you had a good look at my computer screen ? It's rather colourful
sometimes, I can assure you. Are you only familiar with Microsoft's
commercial offerings ? Why do so many scientists work under UNIX ? It's
because they are doing stuff that hasn't even been made "palatable" and
"clickable" yet.